George Hooks rape comments today

[CaptainSensible]

Every time I get into a car, I put myself in a vulnerable position. Am I to take some small bit of blame, if some speeding lunatic crashes into me?

Normally an analogy is supposed to compare like with like, I don't think the speeding driver had any intent to crash into you (unlike the intent of a rapist), now as for you putting yourself in a vulnerable position by driving a car well it is no different to anyone else who drives a car, however if you decided to drive with your eyes closed then you would be more vulnerable to someone crashing into you.

 

[Roxetten]

All of those warnings can be given without ascribing blame to rape victims though.

If a person is assaulted then there is no good to come from saying to that person after the event that "you shouldn't have got into that car", "walked home alone" or whatever, I guess the point is all about prevention.

Going back to the specific case that Hook was commenting on, if a woman goes back to the hotel room of a stranger on a night out, there is always going to be a risk that it won't end well so a judgement call has to be made by the woman as to whether or not the guy is trustworthy.

 

[CaptainSensible]

Not at all, you can say something like

"If someone rapes you then it is their fault, absolutely unequivocally 100% their fault. They and they alone are responsible for the rape. If you are drunk and/or drugged you may be less able to fight someone off or less able to identify them in a police lineup so unfortunately you need to be aware of those possibilities when you are on a night out"

But that is exactly what they are saying except they are going one step further and mentioning that being drunk is also likely to put you more at risk which is a fact, and probably a more salient fact as most rapes aren't situations where some guy pulls some random unsuspecting girl behind a bush, where she has no chance drunk or sober. Now you claim by mentioning this additional point means they are apportioning blame to the victim, I don't agree.

 

[Matlock]

But that is exactly what they are saying except they are going one step further and mentioning that being drunk is also likely to put you more at risk which is a fact, and probably a more salient fact as most rapes aren't situations where some guy pulls some random unsuspecting girl behind a bush, where she has no chance drunk or sober. Now you claim by mentioning this additional point means they are apportioning blame to the victim, I don't agree.

No I didn't.

There is a difference between saying "you are more vulnerable to sexual assault when you are drunk" and saying "if you are drunk then you are partially to blame for your sexual assault because you allowed yourself to be vulnerable"

 

[Thierry Onreal]

Every time I get into a car, I put myself in a vulnerable position. Am I to take some small bit of blame, if some speeding lunatic crashes into me?

Yes because if you never left the house it would never have happened.

 

[Donald Trump]

Normally an analogy is supposed to compare like with like, I don't think the speeding driver had any intent to crash into you (unlike the intent of a rapist), now as for you putting yourself in a vulnerable position by driving a car well it is no different to anyone else who drives a car, however if you decided to drive with your eyes closed then you would be more vulnerable to someone crashing into you.

But, people put themselves in vulnerable positions all the time. When said speeding lunatic crashes into me, they are to blame. When a reporter is kidnapped reporting the news in a war torn country, they are not blamed, the perpetrators are.

But, when it comes to rape, the victims behaviour is questioned. The problem, with this, is it likely discourages many victims from reporting the rape.

By all means promote responsible drinking, staying with friends, sharing a cab home etc. But questioning what a victims behaviour was, after the rape, sends out a terrible message.

 

[Donald Trump]

Yes because if you never left the house it would never have happened.

 

[Thierry Onreal]

 

[steve sanders]

Niamh Horan is frequently a tosser but that is neither here nor there. The issue I have with what Hook (and Horan) say is that they start from the position that the person entirely responsible for the rape is the rapist and then go all to claim that not withstanding that the victim has to take some blame. That isn't logical. If the blame lays with the rapist, then the behaviour of the victim is immaterial.

I don't really agree. I read it as them saying there are a certain amount of rapists out there and by taking risks there's a chance you could end up a victim.

I don't see the two things as contradictory.

 

[mohatmogeansai]

I didn't hear George Hooks comments so don't really know what he said.

However, personal responsibility for ones safety needs to be taken seriously by both males and females. We've all babysat paralytic friends at some point in time and God fucking knows where they'd have ended up otherwise.
A girl I know woke up in a doorway in London. No fucking clue how she got there or what happened.
Another girl I know that was a total booze hound woke up at a party in a strange house where she knew nobody to find some strange man fingering her. That was a massive wake-up call for her and she calmed down on the gatt afterwards.
Predators prey on the vulnerable.
You always need to be able to look after yourself.
I babysat some lads once that were out of their bin on ketamine. They'd have ended up in the river if I wasn't there.
Similarly, they could have been raped / beaten up / robbed very easily.